From owner-freebsd-xen@freebsd.org Tue May 10 16:00:44 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-xen@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DF57B35ADC for ; Tue, 10 May 2016 16:00:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from miguelmclara@gmail.com) Received: from mail-lf0-x236.google.com (mail-lf0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c07::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EF4621044; Tue, 10 May 2016 16:00:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from miguelmclara@gmail.com) Received: by mail-lf0-x236.google.com with SMTP id u64so20203617lff.3; Tue, 10 May 2016 09:00:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=fz/HdIHP0uWbNsGznZdJFksh7cg0HUb37+Yw/9AHSZo=; b=qOfRb1eYBilgQty2JKAsV0ibEq1bTCKyMtWr8bs2eEmoBmQAflwIVaqUscrRkGINPK xM9QYB6AW4ZVL9lB2g3uOHH1p4hdgSsulFnWyskqbXoFd1PJMxm7M7wbfvw3RE6yVsKd Ns6pbXnO44I8hlppnxtzcZto8V8ZvHkimEZ11FddAstaeEiuE7c+OGVflZ6b8Uwz8KTm ZTBxATHCdGtWzUi59gBJAQFD6QzWFmLYfbTbByPvVn91laeALKdNvZmgsUn8SP3+6zVz oGGsyzeoYjn0xX51NmyNVXjD53gkGANUm4+YggvlqzxoTrqoadC1hS1JRu54lJa9FqYz tOHA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=fz/HdIHP0uWbNsGznZdJFksh7cg0HUb37+Yw/9AHSZo=; b=H6iFBK9EBsI89gO9uTs50zML+En8sOTefHSxNcXtNYyl78KovP675YqUEXHAkq8pW4 7L/mOBfMSnDl4I+/CPByRlVNimY5frWzK5M7RTZBgbOAPxK/bUQNd35gJMnr4Ny2QHZd hlGyfPMjECJLB9AG52VZoTMLsWv6a3AFLTPhwOAcRSb6KI4aKrHrMKXe4//KM5Ttv3+R NxPQ/IaxZKcWIJL3mjTaWR94qXqGpX9HdTY559YLe9XNoMNo5LtU9n5NFrwFCBf6Ij5o DyZCwx0qcAjf8T+2y5xx2u/4ASc+w4VRQvk/yB7Gjx7mZnzj1xCdWcT3hEtGdS1Ze2Pr RQDw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FU1pPZrHQ+LA+69i5jEFYAQY+kAKZ8Q907reg4BgxGlmbghDZzivyT6Nl2rtw4647mkQllHnTdJyjFnhQ== X-Received: by 10.25.16.215 with SMTP id 84mr15354821lfq.18.1462896042297; Tue, 10 May 2016 09:00:42 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.25.15.213 with HTTP; Tue, 10 May 2016 09:00:02 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20160510144833.GJ12241@citrix.com> References: <20160503072441.qgqgaw52sijybg4a@mac> <20160503093211.hkmbbqr6t2fbxqqa@mac> <20160510144833.GJ12241@citrix.com> From: Miguel C Date: Tue, 10 May 2016 17:00:02 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: xn ethernet issues as DOMU under NetBSD DOM0 To: Wei Liu Cc: Stephen Jones , "K. Macy" , "freebsd-xen@freebsd.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.22 X-BeenThere: freebsd-xen@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of the freebsd port to xen - implementation and usage List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 May 2016 16:00:44 -0000 See this PR from 2014 --> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=188369 (there another earlier about the same error message on 9.X and that was fixed on 10-CURRENT at the time, but was "broke" later) The issue happen with any NetBSD version from 5.x to 7.x with any xen version but it only stared in FreeBSD 10-Current, so I was always inclined to this being a regression in 10 not a NetBSD backend issue. Also I did post in netbsd mailling list and the reply was something in the lines of "was working fine, nothing changed at our side, so its probably FreeBSD problem" Also as I posted in that PR I experienced a similar issue with Windows GPLPV drivers and the dev fixed it, the issue was that certain features were not supported and the frontend just assume they were cause that's how it works on linux, and I'm no expert so I can go into much detail, but it was related to checksum, tso and I think gso. I tried to bisect the git commits, but there was simply to much changes, what I did find was that this never worked on 10.x +++ only 9, anyway everything was reported there and eventually I got no replies back so I gave up on NetBSD+FreeBSD-10. Unfortunately this needs someone with proper skills on either side (netbsd/freeBSD) to be fixed, the perfect solution would be to add NetBSD backend support for this things (just not sure if its worth the time for the possible performance gain!? - also that's a question for the NetBSD folks ofc)